Baseball Toaster Dodger Thoughts
Help
Jon Weisman's outlet
for dealing psychologically
with the Los Angeles Dodgers
and baseball.
Frozen Toast
Search
Google Search
Web
Toaster
Dodger Thoughts
Archives

2009
02  01 

2008
12  11  10  09  08  07 
06  05  04  03  02  01 

2007
12  11  10  09  08  07 
06  05  04  03  02  01 

2006
12  11  10  09  08  07 
06  05  04  03  02  01 

2005
12  11  10  09  08  07 
06  05  04  03  02  01 

2004
12  11  10  09  08  07 
06  05  04  03  02  01 

2003
12  11  10  09  08  07 
06  05  04  03  02  01 

2002
09  08  07 
About Jon
Thank You For Not ...

1) using profanity or any euphemisms for profanity
2) personally attacking other commenters
3) baiting other commenters
4) arguing for the sake of arguing
5) discussing politics
6) using hyperbole when something less will suffice
7) using sarcasm in a way that can be misinterpreted negatively
8) making the same point over and over again
9) typing "no-hitter" or "perfect game" to describe either in progress
10) being annoyed by the existence of this list
11) commenting under the obvious influence
12) claiming your opinion isn't allowed when it's just being disagreed with

You Can't Stop the Chatter, You Can Only Hope to Contain It
2006-06-27 09:12
by Jon Weisman
Note: The Dodger Thoughts blog has moved to the Los Angeles Times.

Many folks this morning are talking about a rumored trade for Tampa Bay pitcher Mark Hendrickson. I'll break my rule about talking about rumors to just say this much.

As a pitcher, Hendrickson is soaring ... like a man in a barrel at the top of Niagra Falls.

The 6-foot-9 former basketball player is 32 and coming off three seasons where his ERA was below average. His career ERA over 646 1/3 innings is 5.01. Last season, he had a year worthy of the current starting pitchers the Dodgers would have him replace: a 5.90 ERA (73 ERA+), with 14 baserunners per nine innings against 4.5 strikeouts.

In 2006, Hendrickson's ERA is down to 3.81. This career-defying performance through 90 innings is predicated on a BABIP (batting average on balls in play) allowed of .258 - the 12th-lowest of any pitcher in baseball with more than 70 innings. He's had just about as many balls in play, striking out 5.1 batters per nine innings, but thanks to more balls finding gloves, Hendrickson has reduced his baserunners per nine innings to 12.

Now, you can all that luck or skill if you want, but this is the very best Hendrickson can do - and it isn't that spectacular. And it's tenuous. Last year, Hendrickson's BABIP allowed was .329. The year before, it was .300. Unless Hendrickson has truly mastered the game during the past offseason, somewhere in between last year and this year is the real Hendrickson.

One thing Hendrickson might have going for him is that it would be an easier road in the National League West than the American League East. But Hendrickson's former Devil Ray teammates, Danys Baez and Lance Carter, don't provide much support for that argument.

You never really know who's going to work out and who's not. I've almost been as wrong about the starting pitching this year as Ned Colletti. I didn't predict Jae Seo and Odalis Perez would struggle so much. I think I was right about Brett Tomko being mediocre, but I've been wrong about Aaron Sele (so far).

If there's a lesson here, though, it is not to trust the most recent 13 starts of a veteran pitcher. I understand the frustration with the Dodger starting pitching and the imperative to do better, but essentially you've got Perez and Seo at their worst and Hendrickson at his best. Should we assume they will stay that way - given that Perez, Seo and Hendrickson are all perfect illustrations of how much mediocre pitchers fluctuate in performance, of how unreliable recent history is? (Odalis Perez has gone from 4.56 ERA/.292 BABIP in 2005 to 6.33 ERA/.388 BABIP in 2006. He's done a reverse 2006 Hendrickson, or, if you prefer, he's approximated what Hendrickson did from 2004 to 2005.)

A reasonable hope for Hendrickson is that he would come here and give you a 4.00 ERA over six or seven innings. Think about that. That's the hope.

There's no actual trade for Hendrickson for me to write about, but he was worth discussing. There is a price that he'd be worth, but beware of fool's gold.

* * *

Tom Hoffarth of the Daily News blogs a nice obituary for the inventor of the Dodger Dog, Tom Arthur, complete with recollections from former Dodger owner Peter O'Malley.

"The Dodger Dog was definitely his idea; he deserves all the credit," said O'Malley. "It worked out all the details about the extra long casings with the Clougherty family at Farmer John, and they brought it to us one day and asked if they could try an extra-long hot dog.

"We said, sure, try it out. Everyone respected his judgment, and we respected him since the late '50s, when he was doing the concessions for us at the Coliseum. There was no harm in trying it out. And it was a hit from the start."

There seems to be some question about what year the Dodger Dog was introduced. Hoping to get an update.

Update: Hoffarth passes along the news that Dodger team historian Mark Langill pegs the debut of the Dodger Dog to the 1970s:

... the first references to Dodger Dogs in the game programs were in 1970 - the first year Peter O'Malley took over as team president. A hot dog at the stadium could have been unofficially called a "Dodger Dog" without it necessarily being the longer version. A program ad for Farmer John has the tagline: "Try the Dodger Dogs at the Stadium."

* * *

A letter:

Jon -

I have read your blog for the past year but never written in until
now, when an event so shocking has compelled me to share it with the
entire Dodger fan community.

DAVE ROSS HAS 10 HOME RUNS THIS SEASON!!!! THE MOST ANY DODGER HAS IS 9!!!!

I don't know if you were aware of that or not, but THIS IS INSANE. His
line for 2006 is ridiculous, even considering that it's Great American
Ballpark...

GAMES: 37 ABs: 99 AVG: .323 OBP: .397 SLUG: .697 OPS: 1.094

(OPS OF 1.094!!!! THAT IS MANNY RAMIREZ LEVEL!)

I know that 100 at bats is a small sample size, and flukes can happen,
but this is Dave Ross we're talking about!! He is actually owned in
over 97% of ESPN fantasy leages!!! Before spring training I thought he
was out of baseball!!! How can this happen?

HOW ARE DODGER FANS MISSING THIS SIGN OF THE APOCALYPSE?

-Nick C., 16, Sherman Oaks

Comments (166)
Show/Hide Comments 1-50
2006-06-27 10:08:19
1.   Sam DC
For anyone obsessed with this subject, the Nationals chatters are hashing over this deal in a series of comments scattered from #95 to #200 in this thread. Mixed opinions; some think would be a steal for the Devil Rays, others think the Rays need to ask for James Loney too.

One person says "the rumor" also includes the Rays getting Seo "back."

Put no stock in any of this.

http://tinyurl.com/plqho

2006-06-27 10:13:20
2.   Andrew Shimmin
1- They're talking about hybrids in the HOV lanes, too. It's a DT twofer!
2006-06-27 10:24:55
3.   Greg Brock
So let me get this straight. This would make the sum total:

Navarro, Tiffany, and Jackson for Gas Can Carter, Baez, and a power forward. Is anybody checking Colletti's bank account, and if so, are there any deposits coming from Florida?

2006-06-27 10:27:14
4.   DXMachina
3 - Plus a second-string catcher.
2006-06-27 10:28:19
5.   Greg Brock
4 Oh, you're right. I forgot the forgettable Toby Hall.
2006-06-27 10:32:03
6.   Jorden
I can't imagine this being the end of this trade. I would think this is a 3 way trade with someone else...Otherwise I'd think it would have been announced offically by Dodgers.
2006-06-27 10:35:06
7.   regfairfield
6 Well there is the far more likely case that someone just made this up, like 99% of all trade rumors.
2006-06-27 10:41:23
8.   Jacob L
3 Tampa is the new Montreal. Unless they wanna talk Kazmir, we should lose their phone number.
2006-06-27 10:47:51
9.   Jorden
If we did this poor excuse for a trade, it's a 3 way deal with someone else or we enjoy getting [blank] by Tamba Bay.

I mean the backup catcher is a scratch, if we didn't trade navarro to them we wouldn't need another catcher, and Hendrickson is hardly better than perez/seo. I see no gain at all for the Dodgers in this trade.

2006-06-27 10:47:59
10.   natepurcell
from raysbaseball.com from someone that has over 3,000 posts there...
___________________________
I heard from a "friend/source" that they are trying to send Hendrickson, Hall, and Elijah Dukes Crying or Very sad to the Dodgers for Navarro and Billingsley.

That is the hold up. Apparently they really want Dukes, but don't want to give up Billingsley to get him.

We'll see. whistle (a little birdy told me)
_______________________

2006-06-27 10:52:05
11.   ToyCannon
I just hope that somehow we end up with a middle reliever in all this so that Steve can spit up a furrball.
2006-06-27 10:52:08
12.   Sam DC
Tim Kurkjian unintentionally joins the "Alomar Is Really a Coach" brigades.

http://tinyurl.com/ltpbr

2006-06-27 10:53:41
13.   Icaros
11

We will. His name is Mark Hendrickson.

2006-06-27 10:56:03
14.   Andrew Shimmin
Dukes has makeup issues, doesn't he? He's suspended right now, for example, right?
2006-06-27 10:56:21
15.   Humma Kavula
10 Dukes is an interesting prospect, but if that rumor is true, then I think Ned's right to balk at the asking price.
2006-06-27 10:57:05
16.   D4P
Is anybody checking Colletti's bank account, and if so, are there any deposits coming from Florida?

And/or San Francisco...?

2006-06-27 10:58:00
17.   natepurcell
13

Players with awesome beards are just more then "middle relievers" and "back up catchers"

They are the leaders of the free world, they are the glimmer of hope we must cling onto as humanity forges into the future. They are vessels that manifest the divine energy of this universe. THEY ARE THE REASON FOR LIVING.

/end rant on the awesomeness of beards.

2006-06-27 10:58:03
18.   ToyCannon
10
Now were talking, a little juice to the fire. Dukes would make Milton look like a boy scout.
2006-06-27 11:00:37
19.   Sam DC
6-4-2 reports on the Dodger Dog guy: "Originally called a foot-long dog after the hot dogs sold at Coney Island, Arthur's were 10 inches; a customer complaint about the size discrepancy led to the renaming as Dodger Dogs."

Trying to think of a Timmermann joke, but his not having been born at this time is getting in the way.

2006-06-27 11:02:10
20.   natepurcell
Dukes is a beast... literally. he is basically a wild animal.
2006-06-27 11:03:56
21.   ToyCannon
Sorry to hear about the Dodger Dog guy. I'm sure for most of us the 1st memory of DS is eating that Dodger Dog. I hadn't had one in years when I decided to eat one at the DT game Friday Night.
2006-06-27 11:04:12
22.   Andrew Shimmin
Suspended indefinitely, even. Perfect. At least, though, we'd be filling a pressing need in the OF, while casting off another superfluous SP prospect. I've decided I'm taking this trade rumor seriously either.
2006-06-27 11:05:50
23.   Andrew Shimmin
I'm not taking it seriously, I meant. Unless that was my fingers refusing to pass along the lie my brain had formed. Hmm, this will require much introspection.
2006-06-27 11:06:19
24.   Kris F
Dodger Dogs have only been around since the 1980s? Seems too late to me. I've been eating them since I was a kid and I'm celebrating my 51st birthday this year.
2006-06-27 11:13:38
25.   Jon Weisman
24 - I think O'Malley got confused with the introduction of the thicker, all-beef dog.
2006-06-27 11:14:07
26.   Icaros
17

Those things are too itchy.

2006-06-27 11:17:27
27.   Jon Weisman
Dave Ross update up top, courtesy of a reader. I know a few people have been tracking him.
2006-06-27 11:19:21
28.   Jacob L
I'd much rather talk about dumb, superfluous rumors wherein the Dodgers are the ones taking someone to the cleaners. For example - the Rays really want to get Joe Beimel but they don't want to add Crawford to the Kazmir for Navarro trade in order to get him.
2006-06-27 11:24:14
29.   Steve
28 -- Exactly. The mere fact that anybody believes Colletti would theoretically be stupid enough to do this is enough.
2006-06-27 11:24:44
30.   D4P
28
Let's just cut to the chase: Baez for Pujols.
2006-06-27 11:25:15
31.   Blu2
Ken Rosenthal talks like it's a done deal: http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/5735192
2006-06-27 11:27:09
32.   ToyCannon
17
My 1st wife loved my beard and hated me when I didn't have one, my 2nd wife hates any stubble at all. Go figure.
2006-06-27 11:27:36
33.   Blu2
Anybody remember who Dave Ross hit his first major league career homer against? No fair looking it up...
2006-06-27 11:27:56
34.   Icaros
30

You want to trade Baez for a Giants first-base coach?

Fine with me.

2006-06-27 11:28:31
35.   Icaros
33

Mark Grace.

2006-06-27 11:28:41
36.   JoeyP
Fire up that new site Steve.
The Dodgers are getting Collettied.
2006-06-27 11:28:54
37.   D4P
31
LOL: Navarro, Seo AND a player to be named later!
2006-06-27 11:29:36
38.   thinkblue0
well, everyone has pretty much already said what needs to be said about this rumor....trading for more mediocrity really makes me feel like I'm going to slam my head against the wall but nothing has happened yet.

Going for Hendrickson? Okay...but isn't he pretty much worth like a B-level prospect? I would think we could get more back if we packaged Navarro in a bigger deal for someone a little better. Also, the thought of Billingsley going anywhere is just too much to even think about.

2006-06-27 11:29:37
39.   D4P
Regarding Steve's new site: I looked up

firenedcolletti.blogspot.com

earlier today, but it didn't exist yet...

2006-06-27 11:29:39
40.   Andrew Shimmin
So, according to the link in 31, the deal is Seo, Navarro, and a PTBNL. For the guy who's going to back up Sandy Alomar and Hendrickson.
2006-06-27 11:29:46
41.   Blu2
35 Right on.
2006-06-27 11:30:25
42.   King of the Hobos
31 Rosenthal also mentions Seo is included as someone speculated, but Navarro and Seo aren't enough, so we also include a PTBNL.
2006-06-27 11:31:16
43.   D4P
Critics are raving about Hendrickson:

"He's a great fifth starter," a scout says of Hendrickson, 32, who is 6 foot 9, 230 pounds. "He's durable. He's tall. He's very deceptive. Guys get bad swings on him. His stuff isn't great, but at the end of the day you look up and say, "He's not that bad."

I hope that when I'm dead and buried, my tombstone reads "He wasn't that bad."

2006-06-27 11:32:11
44.   JoeyP
I'm honestly shocked how a GM in this day and age, can just ignore periperals and judge players based on ERA and save? Hendrickson is the left handed Brett Tomko.

Rosenthal's article implies that Hall is "insurance"? The guy makes 2.1 mils. He wont be playing in AAA. This means that the Dodgers are going to carry around 2 useless catchers on the bench.

I'm anxiously awaiting the Willy Aybar for Salomon Torres deal any day now.

At least Navarro will get a chance to play everyday in Tampa. And we get stuck with another team's garbage.

Jon needs to revisit the comparisons between Colletti and his predecessor. They arent close.

2006-06-27 11:33:25
45.   das411
Would you guys rather try to shop for starting pitching three weeks from now?
2006-06-27 11:33:52
46.   JoeyP
"He's a great fifth starter," a scout says of Hendrickson, 32, who is 6 foot 9, 230 pounds.

Does this mean Hendrickson is going to back up Aaron Sele, the way Hall wil be backing up Sandy Alomar?

2006-06-27 11:34:08
47.   Andrew Shimmin
So does Hall go to Vegas? Or do we carry three catchers, four shortstops, and four garbage time releif pitchers?
2006-06-27 11:34:46
48.   D4P
Jon needs to revisit the comparisons between Colletti and his predecessor. They arent close.

I have been thinking the same thing all day. "Will this be the transaction that finally pushes Jon into the 'I guess Ned and Depo really are that different after all' camp?"

2006-06-27 11:35:15
49.   Nagman
The last paragraph, re: the Mets wanting Seo back, is curious. Ned will be really embarrassed when the DRays turn Seo around to the Mets for somebody worthwhile.
2006-06-27 11:35:23
50.   JoeyP
Would you guys rather try to shop for starting pitching three weeks from now?

If the team is going to shop, I'd rather not shop at Goodwill. If all the other stores are closed, simply dont shop.

Show/Hide Comments 51-100
2006-06-27 11:35:40
51.   bigcpa
So it's Duaner and Navarro for Hendrickson, Hall and we pick up $2M of additional salary.
2006-06-27 11:35:56
52.   thinkblue0
45-

I don't think that's really the point. The point is that we're giving up talent for mediocre at best players.

I mean really, is Hendrickson that much better than Seo? So then why have to include Navarro? It really makes no sense...also, has this deal been officially announced???

2006-06-27 11:37:01
53.   Bob Timmermann
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/h/hendrma01.h
2006-06-27 11:37:03
54.   thinkblue0
So does Hall go to Vegas? Or do we carry three catchers, four shortstops, and four garbage time releif pitchers?

that just put it all into perspective...and it hit me like a ton of bricks.

2006-06-27 11:37:47
55.   Greg Brock
52 If the only sure thing is a press release, then no, it hasn't been "officially announced."
2006-06-27 11:38:09
56.   Sushirabbit
As one who has called for another "real" starting pitcher, let me point out that this is the definition of panic trade.

If true, like the adventures of Ross, and the addition of Jim Tracy as the candidate for president 2008, it can only mean the "APOCALYPSE" is nigh!

2006-06-27 11:39:47
57.   Jacob L
Navarro netted the Yankees Randy Johnson.
2006-06-27 11:40:44
58.   D4P
Jim Tracy as the candidate for president 2008

I think Tracy would make a good military general.

"Did I order the code red? Did I order the code red? You're d***n right I ordered the code red!"

(Apologies for the d***n)

2006-06-27 11:41:32
59.   Andrew Shimmin
53- At least Hendrickson makes 80% of his freethrows. That's gotta be worth something. I hope he doesn't think to bring it up in his arbitration hearing. Or during the one the year after that.
2006-06-27 11:42:17
60.   thinkblue0
guh....I think this is a done deal....I'll now commence trying to swallow my own tongue.
2006-06-27 11:42:49
61.   Icaros
So does Hall go to Vegas? Or do we carry three catchers, four shortstops, and four garbage time releif pitchers?

No, Hall will now be flipped to Arizona for Shawn Green to balance everything out.

2006-06-27 11:43:50
62.   JoeyP
Hendrickson could help the Lakers more than the Dodgers.
2006-06-27 11:43:51
63.   Uncle Miltie
"He's a great fifth starter," a scout says of Hendrickson, 32, who is 6 foot 9, 230 pounds. "He's durable. He's tall. He's very deceptive. Guys get bad swings on him. His stuff isn't great, but at the end of the day you look up and say, "He's not that bad."
Is the scout Ned Colletti? At the very least, he works for the Dodgers.

As much as I dislike Seo Seo, he was a decent insurance policy. He didn't have any options left but I think he would have cleared waivers.

So the D-rays already bent Ned over once, yet he had to come back for seconds? Does he enjoy subjecting Dodger fans to this type of torture?

2006-06-27 11:44:08
64.   ToyCannon
From a Rob Neyer Chat with a Sandy Koufax quote:
"In the end, it all comes down to talent. You can talk all you want about intangibles, I just don't know what that means. Talent makes winners, not intangibles. Can nice guys win? Sure, nice guys can win -- if they're nice guys with a lot of talent. Nice guys with a little talent finish fourth, and nice guys with no talent finish last."

Sandy meet Toby Hall

2006-06-27 11:46:10
65.   Sam DC
For Nate, from Post Orioles beat writer Jorge Arangure Jr.'s chat today:

Columbia, Md.: Is Baltimore ready for the return of Sal Fasano? Sal's Pal's will be running wild tonight at the yard!

Jorge Arangure Jr.: I'm looking forward to seeing Sal. He's a great guy and an honest guy. He had a sense of humor and he knew the game really well. It would not surprise me if he became a manager or coach some day. I'm not so sure about the fu manchu mustache though. I'll have to ask what he was thinking there.

2006-06-27 11:47:38
66.   Greg Brock
To be fair, I've been complaining that the Dodgers were getting out-hustled in the low post for years. At least this will give us the strength on the glass that we've been looking for.
2006-06-27 11:47:51
67.   Blu2
63 So the D-rays already bent Ned over once, yet he had to come back for seconds? Does he enjoy subjecting Dodger fans to this type of torture?

So what did you expect? He is from San francisco...

2006-06-27 11:47:59
68.   thinkblue0
63-

See, Seo and Hendrickson are basically a wash...so why bother making this trade in the first place. AND add Navarro? It just defies all logic to do this....oh, I forgot we're taking on 2 mill with Toby Hall. this better be followed by Alomar being DFA'd.

This trade is really, REALLY baffling.

2006-06-27 11:48:14
69.   D4P
I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if Oh Dallas is the next to go.
2006-06-27 11:51:33
70.   Jon Weisman
44/48 - I wrote:

"While there are certainly differences between the two, Colletti is more DePodesta than many realize."

I never said they were the same.

I wrote:

"As a result, despite the pervasive front office chaos and major roster turnover since the McCourt family bought the team in 2004, the Dodgers remain on something of a consistent long-term trajectory."

I don't think replacing Seo with Hendrickson and changing backup catchers when a 22-year-old is the starting catcher really changes that.

I wrote:

"The Dodgers remain what they are -- a team with twitchy ownership, a mix of talented and disposable veterans, and hopes that home-grown prospects will eventually carry the day."

That hasn't changed. It may change, but it hasn't.

We can argue these points if you want. You can bring up all the differences and say they're not close, and then I can bring up all the similarities. I just don't want what I wrote to be misrepresented.

So ...

Trading Seo for Hendrickson is essentially a non-event in this debate. Trading Navarro for Hall is less so, though we do know that DePo liked having a veteran backup catcher. But no, I don't suspect DePo trades Navarro for Hall.

Does that make DePo and Colletti more different than I previously thought? I guess. Happy?

2006-06-27 11:51:33
71.   thinkblue0
69-

At the rate we're going it won't just be Oh Dallas...he'll be packaged with Dewitt and a ptbnl for Julian Tavarez.

2006-06-27 11:51:37
72.   bigcpa
I thought Philly was desperate for a young catcher. I don't get the sense Ned shopped Navarro.
2006-06-27 11:52:13
73.   Jacob L
66 Right. The perennial weakness in defending the pick and roll.

Honestly, this is Carter/Baez redux. Just because a prospect doesn't figure in the plans for your team, doesn't mean you give them away.

The Rays just did with Hendrickson what we should be doing with Izturis. Turn a short term hot streak into a big return in trade. Instead, we're probably going to have Izturis start the rest of the year at third. Stir, add water. Remove from heat when OPS reaches 600.

2006-06-27 11:53:09
74.   D4P
Trading Seo for Hendrickson is essentially a non-event in this debate.

Except:

Hendrickson: $1.95 million
Seo: $350,000

2006-06-27 11:54:09
75.   Steve
Neddy's all right
Grady's all right
They just seem a little weird
Surrender
Surrender
But don't give yourself awayyyyy...
2006-06-27 11:54:36
76.   thinkblue0
Trading Seo for Hendrickson is essentially a non-event in this debate. Trading Navarro for Hall is less so, though we do know that DePo liked having a veteran backup catcher. But no, I don't suspect DePo trades Navarro for Hall.

I agree...essentially we haven't downgraded with this deal...the problem I have is dealing prospects for trash. I have to believe that if we packaged Jackson, Tiffany, and Navarro we could have gotten more than Baez, Carter, Hendrickson, and Hall. It just seems as if Flanders is wasting our trading chips...

2006-06-27 11:54:38
77.   Sushirabbit
I half expect to hear that we had a "verbal agreement" with the Yankees to trade Alomar for Shawn Chacon or somebody like that, only to have that "fall apart" and we can all hear George laughing.
2006-06-27 11:55:02
78.   Jon Weisman
70 - In other words, you don't need me to talk about the differences between DePo and Colletti. The entire world was saying DePo and Colletti are different. I agree that they are different. But if that's all you see, then you're missing something.
2006-06-27 11:56:54
79.   Sushirabbit
Grady, told me, yes he told me, I'd meet pitchers like you....
2006-06-27 11:57:15
80.   D4P
Throwing it all away
Throwing it all away
Is there nothing that I can say
To make you change your mind
I watch the world go round and round
And see mine turning upside down
You're throwing it all away.
2006-06-27 11:57:35
81.   blue22
74 - Salaries aside, Hendrickson may be more suited to DS than Seo, based on their respective G:F (1.30 to .94).

This trade looks to be recognizing that fact, with Navarro the cost of the upgrade.

2006-06-27 11:57:57
82.   Robert Daeley
What if Ned were after Carl Crawford and that's what the delay was as they bartered the price of him with Hendrickson and Hall?
2006-06-27 11:58:08
83.   JoeyP
You can bring up all the differences and say they're not close, and then I can bring up all the similarities.

On a day like this, it might be nice to be reminded of the similarities. So far, I cant seem to think of any.

2006-06-27 11:58:55
84.   Uncle Miltie
Like I said yesterday...

Aybar for Salomon Torres (former Giant!)

Izturis for Aaron Boone, Joe Randa, or David Bell (former Giant!)

Kuo and Greg Miller for Tood Jones (former all star, proven closer)

If Martin slumps, we have a guy who is good at throwing out runners. Hall's defense is good in that he's able to shut down the running game. On the other hand, he doesn't block the plate and seems to allow a lot of wild pitches. I've also heard him criticized for calling a bad game. But he makes up for that with his .261 OBP!

2006-06-27 11:59:39
85.   Jacob L
A bad trade, sure. But bad enough to post Phil Collins lyrics?!?
2006-06-27 12:00:10
86.   Icaros
On a day like this, it might be nice to be reminded of the similarities. So far, I cant seem to think of any.

DePo and Colletti both like to sprinkle Parmesan on their Spaghetti-Os.

2006-06-27 12:00:17
87.   Greg Brock
Hey, this could very well be a precursor to something else...You know, like Hendrickson, Alomar, DeWitt and Hall for Sal Fasano.
2006-06-27 12:00:42
88.   JoeyP
If you admit that Seo for Hendrickson is a watch, then that leaves Toby Hall for Dionner Navarro?

Is their any GM outside of Washingon DC that would even contemplate such a trade?

We're talking Jim Bowden levels of incompetance. That isnt good.

2006-06-27 12:01:20
89.   Jon Weisman
83 - Well, you're welcome to re-read my article. I've documented the similarities.
2006-06-27 12:01:36
90.   Robert Daeley
Oh, and Hendrickson isn't the only one with the fun facial hair ;)

http://tinyurl.com/p56b2

2006-06-27 12:01:43
91.   D4P
81
Selected Dodger G/F ratios:

Carter: 1.19
Hamulack: 1.60
Odalis: 1.42

I could go on, but I don't feel like it.

2006-06-27 12:01:44
92.   D4P
81
Selected Dodger G/F ratios:

Carter: 1.19
Hamulack: 1.60
Odalis: 1.42

I could go on, but I don't feel like it.

2006-06-27 12:01:48
93.   thinkblue0
This trade looks to be recognizing that fact, with Navarro the cost of the upgrade.

is Navarro worth that absolutely minimal upgrade?

2006-06-27 12:02:25
94.   Jon Weisman
88 - I didn't say it was a wash. I said it was a non-event in the debate we were having - the Colletti-DePo debate.
2006-06-27 12:02:48
95.   Icaros
We're talking Jim Bowden levels of incompetance.

No, that would entail dealing Billingsley and Guzman for Jorge Cantu with the expectation that Cantu moves behind the dish.

2006-06-27 12:05:33
96.   Uncle Miltie
90- that's was I call chin junk. That is not a "real" beard. He should be fined immediately just for having that.
2006-06-27 12:05:59
97.   thinkblue0
why the heck are we taking back Hall here? Wouldn't this deal be better if it were just seo and navarro for hendrickson...instead we've gotta take back that 2 mill as well?
2006-06-27 12:06:18
98.   Greg Brock
Why, exactly, are we having a DePo/Colletti debate? One is here, one is gone, and one of them has a Devil Rays fetish. If you're going to trade with one team, I'd prefer it isn't the laughingstock of professional baseball. Of course, I'd also prefer it if we weren't the ones getting fleeced in every trade. Just one man's opinion.
2006-06-27 12:07:24
99.   Jon Weisman
98 - "Why, exactly, are we having a DePo/Colletti debate?"

Last thing I want to do today.

2006-06-27 12:08:15
100.   bigcpa
This trade is not Kazmir for The Wrong Zambrano, but it's another window into the mind of the guy at the wheel. Like the Baez deal you just don't see any creativity or appreciation for peripherals or upside- that nerdy sabermetric stuff.
Show/Hide Comments 101-150
2006-06-27 12:08:17
101.   Jon Weisman
I have another post lined up, but I'm still waiting for an on-the-record source for the trade.
2006-06-27 12:08:43
102.   thinkblue0
98-

I think Colletti has the Drays as the poison control button on his speed dial.

2006-06-27 12:11:06
103.   D4P
Well, I'm not going to defend the "Depo/Colletti debate," but I would like to point out that it represents a larger debate that I'm sure many of us are interested in, to wit "Sabremetric principles, etc. vs. The Old-School." There are good reasons why so many of us don't like this trade, and those reasons have a lot to do with this debate.
2006-06-27 12:13:06
104.   Blu2
More confirmation: http://insidethedodgers.mlblogs.com/my_weblog/
2006-06-27 12:14:09
105.   Josh G
Josh Rawitch posted the press release for the trade on Inside the Dodgers. It's official.
2006-06-27 12:14:50
106.   D4P
104
Some tidbits:

We've acquired Mark Hendrickson, one of the top lefties in the AL this year

Ugh.

We're also putting Brett Tomko on the 15-day DL, so we'll carry three catchers at this time

Mixed emotions.

2006-06-27 12:14:58
107.   Sam DC
72 gets at my sense of disquiet. It is surprising to me in the extreme that Navarro was not more valuable than this in trade. Of course, if someone else was really offering more, why wouldn't Colletti have taken it?
2006-06-27 12:15:46
108.   underdog
The trade is officially on the record, according to press release on Inside the Dodgers.

They call Hendrickson "one of the top lefties in the AL this year" (I do like them acquiring a lefty, I think in this division that's one thing they really needed since OP has struggled but it's still a little head scratching)

And placed Tomko on the DL, so they will carry.. 3 catchers? Yup. What do we know about Hall?

2006-06-27 12:17:14
109.   underdog
Damn, I gotta type faster! ;-)

I'm not surprised Navarro was traded but do agree with many of you here that we should have gotten more. This seems like a slightly desperate move but we'll see. (I know the Yankees would have loved Navarro back, but don't have a ton to offer either.)

2006-06-27 12:17:29
110.   thinkblue0
well, the deal is done....let's hope we get the Hendrickson that has performed pretty well this year...
2006-06-27 12:18:09
111.   Blu2
107 Of course, if someone else was really offering more, why wouldn't Colletti have taken it?

Because he's an idiot!

2006-06-27 12:18:25
112.   bigcpa
107 But if no one is offering more that's the sign you're selling low. Sandy Alomar is the reason Navarro feels like a spare part. Martinez is the reason Aybar is player nickel slots. You sign these veteran stopgaps and they become part of the problem with no long-term benefit.
2006-06-27 12:20:04
113.   JoeyP
103. Players acquired by Colletti and the old school reason:

Brett Tomko: he's an "innings eater"
Sandy Alomar: he has veteran clubhouse presence
Toby Hall: Veteran, defensive player
Mark Hendrickson: he's an "innings eater"
Danys Baez: he had 41 saves, must be good...
Lofton: he's a veteran that knows how to win
Mueller: he's a veteran that knows how to win
Lance Carter: he's an all star
Ramon Martinez: he's a scrappy veteran

I could go on but it really comes down to competantly evaluating players based on the right measures. Colletti made three mistakes in Baez/Seo/Carter in not recognizing their peipherals. It appears he's doing the same with Hendrickson. One time, ok its a fluke mistake everyone makes them. 3-4 times is a pattern that doesnt bode well for the future.

2006-06-27 12:20:09
114.   Sam DC
The comments at Inside the Dodgers are very upbeat.

The press release says the Dodgers also get cash.

2006-06-27 12:20:09
115.   Underbruin
I get the feeling 69 has it right... We just traded for a big lefty who historically has been below-average. I get the feeling Colletti's only doing so because he's planning on getting rid of the only other lefty 'starter' on staff.
2006-06-27 12:20:57
116.   underdog
But seriously, blu, I really don't think he was offered more for Navarro. We're making assumptions here with no knowledge of the inside goings on. If he was offered more for Navarro I think he would have taken it. Now maybe he's less an idiot than impatient, as perhaps he could have waited longer for someone to offer more as the trade deadline approached. On the other hand, the options for SP could have decreased even further at that point. Who knows?
2006-06-27 12:21:36
117.   dzzrtRatt
The reality of the marketplace is, a 22-year-old AAA catcher with below average defensive skills but who handles pitchers well and can hit a little is not worth as much as a "innings-eater" left-handed starting pitcher. In terms of how many games Navarro will win for you, it's deemed to be less than how many a guy like Hendrickson will.

I don't like this trade, but it reflects the equities of the market.

What I find hard to fathom is how bad Seo turned out to be. We gave up a good pitcher to get that guy. I hope we don't find out later that he's actually fabulous, and we just got him at the wrong moment.

2006-06-27 12:21:46
118.   Robert Daeley
PTBNL: Lance Carter? ;)
2006-06-27 12:22:25
119.   thinkblue0
You sign these veteran stopgaps and they become part of the problem with no long-term benefit.

exactly.

Getting Hendrickson doesn't bother me...in fact, I'm kind of hopeful that we can pitch pretty well for us. It's the little parts that irritate me....throwing in Navarro for no reason AND taking Toby Hall back. Shouldn't it have been the other way around? Like, we take Hall and his salary back so they'll throw in an extra minor leaguer?

Obviously Martin is our catcher so losing Navarro really isn't the end of the world...but the more prospects you deal for mediocre players, the less prospects you have to include in a deal for a real impact player come deadline time. I just don't get Colletti's line of thinking here...

2006-06-27 12:22:50
120.   JoeyP
They call Hendrickson "one of the top lefties in the AL this year"

When the McCourts hired Camille Johnston to head their PR, it was one terrific move. Mr. Rawitch has a way with words.

2006-06-27 12:23:43
121.   Jon Weisman
103 - You get that I don't like today's trade, right?
2006-06-27 12:24:52
122.   D4P
115
Yep. Plus, Oh Dallas is viewed (whether fairly or not) as a whining clubhouse cancer who complains about no run support. Hendrickson is viewed (wfon) as an angel.

PS: Regarding whether Ned was offered "more" for Navarro - we probably define "more" differently than Ned does.

2006-06-27 12:24:59
123.   JoeyP
In terms of how many games Navarro will win for you, it's deemed to be less than how many a guy like Hendrickson will

How do you figure?
Navarro is 22 yrs old. He's played well the time he's played in the big leagues.

The problem with Hendrickson is that a guy like that isnt going to win you more games than he'll lose. He's way below average. He has little to no upside.

I'd have to disagree with you. An everyday catcher is more valuable than a 5th starter.

2006-06-27 12:26:52
124.   underdog
Also, maybe I'm wrong, but I recall a lot of people here earlier in the season, being quite frustrated with Navarro - particularly his defense (lack of throwing out runners, inability to block balls in the plate, etc), myself included. Now I realize he's still young and has a world of talent and think those things can be fixed - and maybe were even related to the injury - and he also started to hit better before he went on the DL. But still, he seemed to have regressed.

Add that to the fact that teams know the Dodgers are settled on Martin at this point and were planning on unloading Navarro, so how much bargaining power do you think they had here?

I'm just sayin'....

Now let's hope we get the Hendrickson who has been solid this year and not the freak of nature he might appear to be.

2006-06-27 12:26:57
125.   Steve
I refuse to hang this millstone around the "traditionalists" neck. I see no proof that they want it. This is not nostalgia. This is dementia.
2006-06-27 12:27:43
126.   Greg Brock
This one isn't even in the pantheon of possible bad trades. Sure, we probably could have gotten more for Navarro, but this measures about a 2 on the max impact scale. I guess the ire drawn by the trade is more about reinforcing the idea that Colleti is oblivious to metrics beyond ERA, batting average, etc.

When people step back and look at the deal, is it really that much of a factor?

2006-06-27 12:28:05
127.   JoeyP
116. Underdog, the reason for contention over this trade is that Hendrickson doesnt help the team. He's a 5th starter. He's not a difference making pitcher. If you cant trade Navarro for anything more, then simply keep him. No one knows the future of Russ Martin. He could have a career ending injury tonite, who knows? But at least Navarro is a nice insurance policy to have.

Trading something usefull, for something that cant help at all is never a good trade.

2006-06-27 12:28:11
128.   D4P
121
Absolutely. I just mean that the "Colletti/Depo" debate is probably more of a "Sabre/Old School" debate than anything else, which is a debate most of us freely participate in on a daily basis (whether explicitly or not). This debate is largely what makes baseball so interesting these days, at least for me.
2006-06-27 12:29:43
129.   Jon Weisman
New post up top.
2006-06-27 12:30:38
130.   Jon Weisman
"If you cant trade Navarro for anything more, then simply keep him. No one knows the future of Russ Martin. He could have a career ending injury tonite, who knows? But at least Navarro is a nice insurance policy to have."

I agree completely.

2006-06-27 12:32:16
131.   D4P
126 and others:
Regarding the notion that the negative impact of this trade isn't really large in magnitude, consider this:

Let's say I give you a dollar, and you give me a penny in exchange. That's a bad trade for me, but will I really miss the 99 cents? No, I won't. But it's still a stupid trade, and I still should have gotten more in exchange for my dollar than a penny. At the very least, I could have simply kept my dollar and saved it for a rainy day.

2006-06-27 12:32:45
132.   thinkblue0
When people step back and look at the deal, is it really that much of a factor?

It's not, and I agree. The problem is that it's scary. This is two trades now where this has happened. I've compeltely held off judgment of Flanders..and I will all the way through the deadline. But it's deals like this and the Baez one that scare the bejeezus out of me. I'm terrified of what might happen at the trade deadline.

Trading something usefull, for something that cant help at all is never a good trade.

exactly. If this was say, Seo and a ptbnl for Hendrickson then the deal makes sense. But it's like we threw Navarro in for no reason. We do have an overflow of prospects and I'm not against trading a couple of them...but I don't want to trade young guys with talent for league average pitchers. We have enough league average pitchers as it is.

2006-06-27 12:36:16
133.   Greg Brock
131 I completely agree with you, it's a bad deal. I just get the sense that the outrage is beginning to snowball to a level incommensurate with the impact (not speaking to you or anyone in particular).

I'm saving my outrage for the inevitable far worse trade that will be coming down the pike in the next three weeks.

2006-06-27 12:37:57
134.   bluegold
Before you guys call Colletti an idiot, why don't you digest this first: You have never been a baseball gm; you don't have the info that Colletti has; you don't have meetings with Little; you don't have Dodgers scouts reporting to you; you don't have jack. All you have is hindsight and your PC keyboard.
2006-06-27 12:39:48
135.   Greg Brock
134 Sorry Ned. We'll try to dial it down.

I really like your moustache

Just kidding

2006-06-27 12:40:02
136.   D4P
134
Colletti is an id...Oh, never mind.
2006-06-27 12:40:24
137.   JoeyP
All you have is hindsight and your PC keyboard

How is it hindsight when the deal is ripped before its even consumated?

I dont think it took hindsight to know Tomko was bad, or that Hendrickson will probably be bad.

2006-06-27 12:41:54
138.   godvls
I think we traded Navarro for Hendrickson. Seo is the throw in.
2006-06-27 12:46:18
139.   Jon Weisman
138 - That's an interesting interpretation, but I don't think it makes the trade look any better.
2006-06-27 12:47:37
140.   Steve
And yet, Colletti remains an idiot.
2006-06-27 12:52:37
141.   godvls
139 - I agree that it doesn't make the deal look any better, but that's the way I see the trade. The trade doesn't look good now, but neither did Bradley & Perez for Andre Ethier of ASU (Bradley's issues aside). There certainly doesn't appear to be much upside for Hendrickson. If Navarro goes the way of Angel Pena & Gilberto Reyes it won't matter.
2006-06-27 12:54:05
142.   bluegold
135, 136
There... that's better.
2006-06-27 12:56:24
143.   Steve
neither did Bradley & Perez for Andre Ethier of ASU

Yes it did.

2006-06-27 12:57:29
144.   Jorden
I was expecting more from Ned...I remember him saying "there isn't anyone that really catches my eye" How does this avg. joe of a pitcher catch your eye? The only thing I can think of is Hendrickson, Age 32 is still 8 years younger than the players Ned was working with in SF...So in Ned's eyes, he stole another young all star.

Hot off the press: Ned offers Gagne bobble head for Baez bobble head.

2006-06-27 12:59:10
145.   Andrew Shimmin
134- Unless you've been a GM, had scouts report to you, and whatever else your list was, I don't recognize your authority to question my opinions.
2006-06-27 13:04:18
146.   bluegold
145 - True, I have no authority to question your opinion. But I have the right to point out the facts.
2006-06-27 13:06:57
147.   Steve
"Ned Colletti is an idiot" is a fact.
2006-06-27 13:07:24
148.   Jon Weisman
Can we just acknowledge that very few Dodger Thoughts commenters have ever been major league general managers and move on?
2006-06-27 13:07:47
149.   Greg Brock
I've never been a submarine captain, but I know it's not a good idea to drive one into an underwater mountain.
2006-06-27 13:09:22
150.   Andrew Shimmin
146- The facts that I don't have any credentials? Okay. But isn't that a little boring, appealing to authority? This comes up here and there, and I never understand the point. You were willing to argue, in the last thread, the merits of the trade. Why jump ugly over credentials, now?
Show/Hide Comments 151-200
2006-06-27 13:10:23
151.   Andrew Shimmin
Should have refreshed. Sorry for the pile on.
2006-06-27 13:10:46
152.   Steve
You were willing to argue, in the last thread, the merits of the trade.

Nature abhors a vacuum.

2006-06-27 13:10:58
153.   Jorden
Seo sucked and Navarro wasn't being used...If Ned's attempt at d-train was derailed, we got a 5th starter for nothing in my eyes. We still have all our farm and can now focus on an outfielder and/or reliever. I'm sure there's more going on that this deal...I hope...
2006-06-27 13:14:02
154.   Jon Weisman
153 - If you think Seo was bad, why do you think Hendrickson solves that problem, when everything about him save for about a dozen starts this year has been as bad as or worse than Seo?
2006-06-27 13:15:28
155.   Greg Brock
154 Everyone looks better when they throw left-handed.
2006-06-27 13:21:20
156.   Jorden
"If you think Seo was bad, why do you think Hendrickson solves that problem, when everything about him save for about a dozen starts this year has been as bad as or worse than Seo? "

Seo walks in winning runs, his only reason coming to LA was for the starting role in the new Superman. As for navarro he had one impressive game and a base hit meant you get 2nd base for free.

Hendrickson isn't the best, but 3.81 isn't bad, and .220 on the road, maybe he'll play in LA like it's the road. One game he pitched 9 innings, 3 hits and no earned runs and still lost... I won't miss SEO a bit and navarro wasn't cutting it. Plus we got some money from the deal.

If this is the only trade we do before July 31st I'd be upset, however I think we have something else lined up.

2006-06-27 13:24:53
157.   bluegold
150 - I don't mind arguing the merits of the trade, I'm all for it. I just have problems with people calling Colletti an idiot when those people don't have the info that Colletti has. If we DO have a nitwit as gm, then there is no rhyme or reason why the Dodgers should be in 1st place unless you believe in the tooth fairy.
2006-06-27 13:26:00
158.   Jon Weisman
156 - I don't think you are looking at the bigger picture. Anyone can pick out one good game for a pitcher. But my larger point is - it's not that Hendrickson can't do what you say - it's that there's no more reason to think he'll do it than there was when Seo was acquired.
2006-06-27 13:26:36
159.   Steve
It's true that Colletti probably doesn't know he's an idiot.
2006-06-27 13:26:59
160.   Greg Brock
157 So Depo went from great GM to lousy GM in 365 days then?

Nice singular connection between GM and success.

2006-06-27 13:44:50
161.   Midwest Blue
a little late, but...

135 - LOL!

2006-06-27 13:48:42
162.   Jorden
Jon Weisman, I'm just trying to be positive about the trade. I was furious at first because I expected a run at someone bigger...The fact of the matter is, Ned wants to save our farm...making a run for dtrain would have costed an arm and a leg, we filled the 5th spot in our rotation and didn't give up jack.

We have 2 pitchers under 3.00 ERA, 2 more under 4.00 ERA (including hendrickson) and a rookie that was doing fine until last night.

If if Hendrickson sticks to his current stats we're still doing way better than with Seo.

Seo -Home:5.65 Road: 6.00 (5.78 total)
Hendrickson-Home:5.75 Road: 2.20 (3.81 total)

Maybe Hendrickson will play in LA like it's AWAY. Regardless, we have a better starter.

2006-06-27 14:07:38
163.   alex 7
I think we are getting to the point where we can start opining on Colletti based on actual returns of his moves.
We're not "just" calling him an idiot, we're looking at the deals he's made so far, at our expanding salary, and at our loss of three prospects with enough hype that we should have gotten more for them than we did (nothing so far).
2006-06-27 14:14:57
164.   underdog
Yeah, the more I think about it, the more a straight Navarro for Hendrickson trade would have seemed okay. The other aspects of the deal make less sense to me. I really do think Hendrickson will be better than Seo this year (from what little I've seen of the former, and too much seen of the latter) but all the other aspects of the trade make it seem odder.

I agree with the above poster (responding to my response) that having Navarro as insurance made me feel better in case Martin gets hurt, especially since we know that Alomar won't be around much longer. That said, the catcher we did get (in this weird trade) is a pretty good one, he will make a very solid backup (which sounds like damning with faint praise but isn't meant to). Toby Hall - two huge baseball fans I work with (and fantasy GMs) walked by just now to tell me that Toby Hall's a really solid catcher. FWIW.

Perhaps part of the reason here is also to give Navarro a chance to start somewhere else? Not that it's all about charity here - and perhaps I'm being charitable - but I still say, Hendrickson's better than Seo and Hall could even be better than Navarro. (Still, I wish they hadn't given up on Seo so quickly.)

2006-06-27 14:15:53
165.   underdog
Does the fact that the Dodgers are in first place not count in the "Colletti's an idiot" running commentary? (Not that they couldn't drop out of first rather quickly, just sayin'..)
2006-06-27 15:16:19
166.   KAYVMON
This was a bad trade, and I do not see any real redeeming possibility, save Hendrickson turning into a stud.

Navarro's value for the next couple of years far outweighs what we got back. The fact that we have Martin does not come close to justifying this trade. Navarro might not have the same value to us as he does to other teams, but clearly, there are other teams who are in need of a catcher and would give us fair value. Right now might just not be the best time.

The only way this trade makes sense is if there are only two teams in MLB, the Dodgers and Devil Rays. And if that were true, this trade would be seen as an act of compassion and generoisity.

Comment status: comments have been closed. Baseball Toaster is now out of business.